Although the calculation of an AUM moved from a set
rate to a complicated formula intended to take into
account market forces and lessee contributions, Maxfield
said little changed as far as current prices are
concerned.

State law requires the rate to ``reflect at least
market value for the same or similar use of the land,''
while including factors that reflect value of state
leases as well as changing industry markets.

Meanwhile, a rancher is seeking a court ruling on the
constitutionality of a state law that gives preferential
renewal rights to the holders of state grazing leases.

The Wyoming Supreme Court dismissed William H.
Riedel's first lawsuit on grounds it was not the proper
path to get the constitutional question before the court.

The state's preferential right law allows lease
holders to match the highest bid of a competitor when
10-year leases come up for renewal.

The new lawsuit was served on the governor and the
other four elected state officials on the state Board of
Land Commissioners during the monthly meeting Thursday.

The lawsuit raises the same issue as the original
lawsuit, which stemmed from the board's decision in early
1998 to renew a 10-year lease held by Craig C. and Gail
M. Anderson in Laramie County.

The Andersons were allowed to meet Riedel's higher
competitive bid for the lease.

The new lawsuit, again filed on Riedel's behalf by
Cheyenne lawyer and former state attorney general Steve
Freudenthal, said the preferential right law costs the
state $6 million a year in lost revenue.

Because of the law, the revenue either is not spent
for the benefit of Wyoming school children or is diverted
from other programs.

That causes an increase ``in the tax burden on Wyoming
citizens,'' according to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit seeks a declaratory judgment that the
state's preferential right law is unconstitutional. It
also asks the court to direct the state board to award
the grazing lease to Riedel.